SuperNET is NOT a coin. do you understand this?
Apparently he doesn't (nor do I, although I do understand teleport, after a lot of effort to do so) and this appears to be a common thread with your projects. Think about that. Just a bit of constructive criticism here. If it sounds like an attack it isn't meant that way at all.
Do you feel confused about how superNET is supposed to work on a technical level, or what it's attempting to offer on the user level?
All of the above, but also if you read the superNET asset documents there is a lot more going on than just "technical level." I'm sure that all the pieces fit together somehow in James's mind and that he believes it is all very compelling, but very few if any other people on this planet have been able to comprehend it.
But forgetting about the way it's structured as an asset, I find the concept pretty simple but it seems people don't see it that way. What it means for crypto users should be pretty simple(that's the whole point). Giving people a simple GUI where they can access multiple currencies and services. Like a portal for crypto. Innovation in crypto seems to move at an incremental pace, so having a single point of access for users that can have upgrades added over time as new currencies come a long that offer new tech seems like a pretty good idea to me. Dividing the user base among different cryptos that all offer their own features doesn't make as much sense as providing a platform where each piece that gets added becomes another part of the puzzle.
I think people get too caught up on the whole asset part of it. People seem to intentionally ignore it because of that, or pull up some sort of wall where they automatically dismiss the whole project(not directed at you, but people in general on this forum). I don't really understand why, but it seems no one understands the base concept. Or maybe they do and they're just specifically misunderstanding wither the asset structure of superNET, or the technical part. Which is fine, especially the technical part as some of those pieces still need to be finished.
Perhaps the documentation should be split in to three separate parts: the user interface, the asset, and the technical documentation. For now all most people need to understand is what it's supposed to mean for the user. Once they understand that they can research the asset part if they want. And more technical people can do their thing with the technical documentation.